Atheism is a belief.

[S.A.M.]

hypothesis: there is a God.

by scientific method: need only one observation to falsify a hypothesis.

please provide said observation.

 

[Enmos]

hypothesis: there is a God.

by scientific method: need only one observation to falsify a hypothesis.

please provide said observation.

God is unknowable, right ? Thus unfalsifiable.

 

[superluminal]

hypothesis: there is a God.

by scientific method: need only one observation to falsify a hypothesis.

please provide said observation.

Wrongo bub-ette.

hypothesis: there is a God.

by scientific method: need many repeatable observations and corroborating experimental or model-based data to confirm a hypothesis.

please provide said repeatable observations and corroborating experimental or model-based data.

 

[superluminal]

God is unknowable, right ? Thus unfalsifiable.

And that too.

 

[(Q)]

hypothesis: there is a God.

by scientific method: need only one observation to falsify a hypothesis.

please provide said observation.

The scientific method is often misunderstood and misused by the misguided.

A hypothesis is essentially a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observations.

Therefore, when one hypothesizes an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent god, one is assumed to have observed such a phenomenon and wishes to better understand it.

The misguided though, seem to think that a complete lack of such an observation coupled with myth and superstition constitutes such observations and deserves credit as a hypothesis.

 

[S.A.M.]

Therefore, when one hypothesizes an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent god, one is assumed to have observed such a phenomenon and wishes to better understand it.

Hmm really? So you are saying that all hypotheses are based on observation?

 

[superluminal]

So you are saying...

AArrrgggghhhh!!!

 

[Enmos]

AArrrgggghhhh!!!

LOL

 

[S.A.M.]

AArrrgggghhhh!!!

You're such a sweetheart!!!

 

[iceaura]

hypothesis: there is a God.

by scientific method: need only one observation to falsify a hypothesis.

please provide said observation.

You argue well. Please send tithes to my girlfriend's cat (that is the God we have failed to falsify) - I will provide you with the necessary PO Box, etc, if your credit cards are maxed.

 

[superluminal]

You're such a sweetheart!!!

I know. Right back atcha, kiddo.

 

[S.A.M.]

You argue well. Please send tithes to my girlfriend's cat (that is the God we have failed to falsify) - I will provide you with the necessary PO Box, etc, if your credit cards are maxed.

I already have a cat. (see avater for sample)

 

[iceaura]

I already have a cat. (see avater for sample)

My girlfriend's cat is your God, however - unless you can provide observational evidence otherwise.

You are behind on your tithes.

 

[S.A.M.]

My girlfriend's cat is your God, however - unless you can provide observational evidence otherwise.

You are behind on your tithes.

I asked my cat. She said your cat is a lesser god, as can be proved by decapitation

PS I have to live with my cat.

 

[(Q)]

Hmm really? So you are saying that all hypotheses are based on observation?

The indoctrinated cultist is forced NOT to accept that which questions their cult thinking processes and inadvertently make up things which they thought they heard as opposed to what was actually said.

 

[S.A.M.]

The indoctrinated cultist is forced NOT to accept that which questions their cult thinking processes and inadvertently make up things which they thought they heard as opposed to what was actually said.

The assumption was yours.

Therefore, when one hypothesizes an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent god, one is assumed to have observed such a phenomenon and wishes to better understand it.

The misguided though, seem to think that a complete lack of such an observation coupled with myth and superstition constitutes such observations and deserves credit as a hypothesis.

Or is it your contention that by assumption you simply imply something you do not actually mean?

 

[(Q)]

The assumption was yours.

The indoctrinated cultist has confirmed in their minds that which they made up is now a factual statement which they thought they heard. Again, their deceptions are not of their own making, but are a result of triggered cult defense mechanisms.

 

[S.A.M.]

So it would seem

Being as it were the philosophy section, however, could you be persuaded to elaborate on the differences between your thought processes and mine where observation and hypothesis are concerned?

These statements would be a good starting point.

Therefore, when one hypothesizes an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent god, one is assumed to have observed such a phenomenon and wishes to better understand it.

The misguided though, seem to think that a complete lack of such an observation coupled with myth and superstition constitutes such observations and deserves credit as a hypothesis.

 

[iceaura]

I asked my cat. She said your cat is a lesser god, as can be proved by decapitation

PS I have to live with my cat.

You can decapitate your cat. The God Cat is not subject to any such whim of yours.

You, however, are subject to the whims of the Cat - unless you can make some kind of disconfirming observation ? (I believe that was your own criterion). Prudence would argue for generous placation of the Cat, lest it grow wrathful.

 

[S.A.M.]

You can decapitate your cat. The God Cat is not subject to any such whim of yours.

You, however, are subject to the whims of the Cat - unless you can make some kind of disconfirming observation ? (I believe that was your own criterion). Prudence would argue for generous placation of the Cat, lest it grow wrathful.

I did and my rebuttal would be to decapitate your cat.

Following that, I am willing to pay tithe every time it mews.

Send it over.